add basic zcap impl based on linked-data-documents #189
Conversation
chunningham
force-pushed
the
feat/zcap_ld
branch
from
8ca6458
to
6ccdb1d
Compare
| "id": "urn:uuid:ad86cb2c-e9db-434a-beae-71b82120a8a4", | ||
| "capabilityAction": "Drive", | ||
| "proof": { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There is a whitespace inconsistency here.
It would be nice if the example files were usable/verifiable. But testing the parsing is good too.
|
Nice work @chunningham, I like the use of generic type parameters. |
chunningham
force-pushed
the
feat/zcap_ld
branch
from
4c83ec1
to
e08e28e
Compare
|
Is there a particular use-case or set of use-cases that Spruce has in mind? |
|
@agropper we are using zcaps for https://github.com/spruceid/kepler |
chunningham
force-pushed
the
feat/zcap_ld
branch
from
da1b192
to
8758cfa
Compare
|
Closes #125 |
src/ldp.rs
Outdated
| @@ -615,6 +615,7 @@ async fn sign( | |||
| created: Some(options.created.unwrap_or_else(now_ms)), | |||
| domain: options.domain.clone(), | |||
| challenge: options.challenge.clone(), | |||
| property_set: options.property_set.clone(), | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As mentioned in https://github.com/spruceid/ssi/pull/189/files#r661613315:
I don't think
property_setshould be passed through into the proofs. There may be issue options that we don't support or know about but that are supposed to have a meaning other than passing them through into the proof. e.g.credentialStatusissue option is supposed to cause acredentialStatusobject to be added to the document rather than to the proof: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/vc-http-api/blob/7c72ae2b470ff8dfec12d3b6c3de4f84c6f2a176/packages/vc-http-api-test-server/__tests__/issueCredential.spec.js#L130-L148
Maybe the options object with open-ended property_set, or the property_set alone, could be transcoded into a stricter version that is parameterized by the proof type and purpose (like in feat/generic_proof), so unknown properties would be caught at that point? Or it could be done non-generically, for the sake of just this PR.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I experimented with generic property_sets for both Proof and LinkedDataProofOptions where the property_set type P for Proof<P> must implement From<&LinkedDataProofOptions<O>> (so that devs can implement how the options translate to custom proof fields). This path is blocked by some custom proof logic (e.g. P256BLAKE2BDigest...2021 expects to add the publicKeyJwk field to the proof properties). Will try a non-generic path.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
property_set has been removed from LinkedDataProofOptions in favour of changing the ProofSuite trait to accept an additional extra_proof_properties: Option<Map<String, Value>> argument for sign and prepare.
Co-authored-by: Charles Lehner <charles.lehner@spruceid.com>
chunningham
force-pushed
the
feat/zcap_ld
branch
3 times, most recently
from
aa88f2d
to
c54987f
Compare
An implementation of the ZCAP-LD specification. The struct is generic over caveats and actions to allow for application-specific definitions of these fields, as they are out of scope for the spec.